SAC-Kemple/Larson

2026 Adult 18 & Over · 3.0 Women

9 players · average NTRP 2.94 · USTA/PACIFIC NW / NORTHERN OREGON

Scouting

Roster averages 2.79 estimated across 9 rated players. No lineup is published in advance, so the column below is where each player has actually been used — a captain's habits are the best available forecast. Sign in and claim your record to see who you have played.

3.16

Lara Greenberg

usually #1 Doubles 40%, also #1 Singles 40% · published 3

2.94

Grainne Koeberl

usually #2 Doubles 44%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3

2.92

Jinmi Kemple

usually #3 Doubles 33%, also #1 Doubles 33% · published 3

2.82

Lina Gao

usually #2 Singles 50%, also #3 Doubles 30% · published 3

2.76

Melissa Tom

usually #2 Singles 57%, also #2 Doubles 14% · published 3

2.71

Jeane Anastas

usually #3 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3

2.69

Melissa Maxwell

usually #1 Doubles 75%, also #2 Doubles 25% · published 3

2.64

Lori Andersen

usually #1 Doubles 42%, also #1 Singles 17% · published 2.5

2.50

Anne Larson

usually #2 Doubles 75%, also #3 Doubles 25% · published 3

Roster

Ordered by our estimated dynamic rating, which is why two players at the same published level are not tied — a published 4.0 says nothing about where inside the band someone sits.

Lara Greenberg

73W–43L career

0%33%67%

3.16

Grainne Koeberl

56W–65L career

0%93%7%

2.94

Jinmi Kemple

75W–78L career

0%93%7%

2.92

Lina Gao

46W–86L career

0%99%1%

2.82

Melissa Tom

39W–38L career

1%98%0%

2.76

Jeane Anastas

14W–31L career

2%98%0%

2.71

Melissa Maxwell

23W–25L career

3%96%0%

2.69

2.5

Lori Andersen

29W–86L career

0%5%95%

2.64

Anne Larson

43W–48L career

34%66%0%

2.50

Three percentages are the year-end projection — chance of moving down, staying, moving up — and the number on the right is our estimated dynamic rating, which USTA never publishes. Percentages are blank where a player has too few matches this season, or at a level where the model does not yet beat a base-rate guess; the estimate is a weaker claim than a probability and survives where those do not.